New Delhi: A US Congressional hearing on Wednesday (December 10) laid bare the current contradictions in the India-US strategic partnership, with American policy experts and lawmakers expressing alarm over the Trump administration's tariff policies and approach toward New Delhi, even as they unanimously affirmed India's critical role in countering China.

The House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on South and Central Asia's hearing on India-US relations saw sharp partisan divisions over President Donald Trump's handling of bilateral relations, particularly his imposition of cumulative 50% tariffs on Indian goods.

In a scathing opening statement, ranking member Sydney Kamlager-Dove accused the Trump administration of squandering decades of diplomatic capital.

"Unless he changes course, Trump will be the American president that lost India, or more accurately, that chased India away – while revitalising the Russian empire, while breaking up the Trans-Atlantic Alliance, while menacing Latin America," the California Democrat said. "That is not a legacy any president should be excited about having."

Kamlager-Dove criticised Trump's "personal obsession with a Nobel Peace Prize" as driving policy toward India. She was referring to Trump’s oft-repeated claim of having mediated and forced India and Pakistan to end their four days of clashes in May, which New Delhi has disputed.

Mentioning the 50% tariff rate on India, among the highest imposed on any country, she noted that this exceeded tariffs on China while Moscow and Beijing were "getting pretty good deals from the administration”.

The Democratic lawmaker also condemned the $100,000 fee on H-1B visas, 70% of which are held by Indians, calling it "a rebuke of the incredible contributions Indians have made to science, technology, medicine and arts in the United States".

Washington state Democratic senator Pramila Jayapal cited constituent concerns about the impact of the tariffs on small US businesses.

“Just last week, I heard from a fifth-generation family-owned company in Washington state that relies on agricultural products from India that can't be sourced at scale in the United States. They told me that these tariffs are the greatest threat to their business in over 120 years, and they're looking at either downsizing or offshoring their production to meet increased costs,” she said.

Chairman Bill Huizenga struck a different tone, describing the US-India relationship as “no longer just important” but “a defining relationship of the 21st century”.

“If America wants a free Indo-Pacific, resilient supply chains and a world where democracy, not authoritarianism, sets the rules, then our partnership with India is critical,” he said.

However, even Huizenga acknowledged concerns, noting a conversation with Latvian parliamentarians earlier that day. "When I mentioned that I was going to be chairing this hearing on India and US relations, the first thing that they brought up was: ‘Please ask them to stop buying Russian oil so that they don't have the cash to be a threat to us’," he said. "So, message received, message delivered."

Despite partisan disagreements among lawmakers on Trump's approach, expert witnesses from leading think tanks emphasised India's indispensability to US strategy in the Indo-Pacific.

Jeff Smith from the conservative Heritage Foundation warned it would be "strategic malpractice of the highest order to discard the quarter-century dividend of trust and partnership we have built with India." He acknowledged the relationship had hit "choppy waters" this year but expressed confidence it could be restored.

Dhruva Jaishankar, executive director of the Observer Research Foundation America, testified that while India has signed five trade agreements recently and is negotiating others, the US-India relationship is currently at a "political standstill" due to the tariff impasse.

Jaishankar, who is the son of India’s external affairs minister S. Jaishankar, noted at the start of his testimony that he was appearing in his personal capacity as an Indian citizen.

Smith pointed out that expectations were high for Trump's second term given the success of his first administration, which revitalised the Quad grouping and suspended aid to Pakistan.

However, he suggested the administration's messaging following the India-Pakistan ceasefire in Kashmir had put Prime Minister Narendra Modi in a "difficult position at home", with critics portraying him as "bending to the will of the US".

During questioning, Kamlager-Dove criticised the administration's "erratic" strategy, establishing through testimony that tariffs were imposed despite ongoing, good-faith negotiations.

Noting that a near-complete deal in July was derailed by Trump’s rejection and subsequent tariff hikes, she characterised the approach as "punish[ing] your partners" rather than building alliances.

Republican and Democratic lawmakers alike pressed witnesses on India's role in countering China, revealing broad consensus on strategic imperatives even amid disagreement over Trump's tactics.

In a rapid-fire exchange, Kamlager-Dove elicited a unanimous "yes" from all witnesses, confirming that the US-India alliance is essential for checking China's influence, empowering the Quad and maintaining regional deterrence.

It was highlighted that the annual Quad leaders summit, involving the US, India, Japan and Australia, has been "indefinitely postponed", while India was expected to host the next gathering in 2025.

"A Quad Leadership Summit has been repeatedly postponed. India is expected to host the next one. I think breaking the impasse in US-India relations would help in getting to that summit, achieving more through the Quad,” said Jaishankar.

Republican lawmakers focused heavily on maritime cooperation and intelligence sharing in the Indo-Pacific.

Huizenga asked the panel: “What concrete actions should Congress take to improve US-India maritime cooperation specifically, and intelligence-gathering to bolster deterrence in the Indo-Pacific?”

Similar concerns regarding strategic security partnerships were raised by California Democrat Ami Bera, who asked about the steps required for the US to maintain strategic security partnerships with India “to counter China”.

Smith responded by highlighting instances of India's pushback against Chinese influence. "Unlike us, it was able to ban TikTok essentially overnight when it saw an espionage and influence operation problem with TikTok. In fact, it banned dozens of Chinese apps when they became problematic.”

Similarly, James Moylan, lawmaker from the US territory of Guam in the Pacific Ocean, wondered whether India will continue to limit the Quad's role to exercises and dialogue or there could be a shift in strategy.

“I think if anything, the Indian government has been leaning more firmly into both security cooperation at a quadrilateral level and also at a bilateral level,” Smith replied.

Republican Mike Baumgartner from Washington state pressed witnesses on India's commitment to defence purchases, suggesting scepticism about the depth of India's partnership.

He shared an anecdote of going through a book on the history of the Indian army in an airport waiting room while on a recent visit to India.

“But I got to a page of foreign partners and there was a full-page picture doing training with Russians, and there was a small little box doing training with Americans. And the next time I go to India, I'd like to see those pages reversed,” he said.

Jaishankar responded that India has had three prime ministers since 1998 who “have all in their own way invested in a deeper partnership with the United States, sometimes against political opposition in their own country”.

However, he noted that there could be a “reduction in direct purchases” as India was looking at indigenising its own defence industry. “And that actually opens up room for co-production and co-development of future systems as well”.

Democratic lawmakers raised concerns about the impact of Trump's immigration policies on bilateral ties.

"Between the attacks on legal immigration and the anti-Indian rhetoric that's coming from individuals in the administration, what do you see as the effect on the US-India relationship and the people-to-people ties that build our goodwill and connection?" Jayapal asked.

Sameer Lalwani of the Special Competitive Studies Project responded that there would be worries “about the deterrence of students, scientists and Indian businesses, technologists that we have counted on for our own technological prowess going forward if there's hostility towards them”.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.